Moderators are inherently going to not be respected by those they moderate, because the interpretation of rules differs.

It is impossible to both moderate and "earn the respect" of those you are moderating.

Actually, I would disagree with you here. If a moderator is not over zealous or heavy handed, but fair and even handed, then I would say that mod would earn the respect of at least some members, especially members that frequent the forums.

I would agree. There are several moderators on these forums (and of course I can't name names) whose activities are a model of responsible and constructive moderation, and who have earned respect for the way that they go about the tasks.

I think that it is possible to see the difference in attitude from the various mods who have contributed to these forums. While some seem to understand that their role is necessary to prevent undeniable excesses (for instance, actual defamation, 'hate' posts, etc) others see their role as shaping the discussion into a form more personally acceptable to them individually, and adjudicating on which opinions are acceptable and not acceptable (of course again a personal view). All of these moderators enforce the same set of rules, and all of them will claim that is all that they are doing, but interpretation of the rules (which are by and large sensible, apart from the infamous rule 3) varies greatly according to the sense of personal mission by the moderator.